Take Three: Unite the USA or Not?

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

George Bush has a third chance to show that he is the uniter he has claimed to be since the debates of the 2000 campaign.

There are major events looming: in the lame duck session, beginning in a few days, Congress must approve a new debt ceiling limit; a new offensive against hardened insurgents in Iraq will begin very soon, bringing with it the usual variances of war and a new request to Congress for an additional additional 79 Billion dollars to continue that war and secure the peace; nominations to fill absent seats on the US Supreme Court may be necessary before the end of this month; the continued impasse between the Congress and the Senate over the formation of legislation regarding a new US Intelligence Chief and, as always, the battle over budget spending bring with it this time a new conflict for the President as members of his own party chafe at the idea of ballooning deficits ad infinitum while he moves to make his tax cuts permanent.

It would seem the perfect time to look for non-partisan ways to solve these and other conflicts. What is your prediction for how he operates this time around? Why you think he will act in a certain way? And finally, will his actions lead to a better future for those of us in the USA?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 4,394 • Replies: 96

No top replies

All both of us say he's paying lip service to uniting us.

0 Replies

Bush started off trying to unite the partisans--and they threw it in his face.

He was all over Kennedy--and adopted Kennedy's No Child Left Behind. He funded it as asked--but then the Dems, wanting to stick a knife in his back, started a talking point, claiming he hadn't funded it. In truth, they did this because they realized education is one of a few areas where they are considered better than the GOP. They felt like they had to find fault with him, and pretty much convinced the US public Bush had underfunded No Child.

The Dems went on the offensive. Bush tried to include them in programs the two sides could agree on.

I expect Bush will start fresh and try again. I think he will appoint some Dems to some cabinet positions or plum assignments. I also expect the Dems may take a couple of offers--and pretty quickly, stick another knife in his back. Unless they got an education from the election.

He extends olive branches. The Dems --formerly led by Daschle, opposed everything in sight.

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

Bush started off trying to unite the partisans--and they threw it in his face.

He was all over Kennedy--and adopted Kennedy's No Child Left Behind. He funded it as asked--but then the Dems, wanting to stick a knife in his back, started a talking point, claiming he hadn't funded it. In truth, they did this because they realized education is one of a few areas where they are considered better than the GOP. They felt like they had to find fault with him, and pretty much convinced the US public Bush had underfunded No Child.

The Dems went on the offensive. Bush tried to include them in programs the two sides could agree on.

I expect Bush will start fresh and try again. I think he will appoint some Dems to some cabinet positions or plum assignments. I also expect the Dems may take a couple of offers--and pretty quickly, stick another knife in his back. Unless they got an education from the election.

He extends olive branches. The Dems --formerly led by Daschle, opposed everything in sight.

Ted Kennedy and Daschle aren't the only people in the country--that's not a good excuse for turning your back on 49%, most of which never served in Congress (and never refused the olive branch). In other words, you can't spit on Jack because Jill played mean.

That said, I think he might try to unite. I hope so, at least.

0 Replies

Steppenwolf--

His interaction was with the Dems in the House and Senate. How would you illustrate Bush turning his back on citizen Democrats? They surely treated him like crap-- but what did he do that merits your comment? (Seriously.)

0 Replies

Lash-

That was merely my argument for why he doesn't have the right to turn his back on the rest of the country. I cited the 49% to indicate that my comment was about the next four years. As I said, I hope he doesn't divide this country, and I don't think that has a right to do so. I'm not arguing either about whether he has already done so.

0 Replies

I heard his first speech after Kerry conceded. He said he wants to heal the damage and work for those who voted for him, and those who didn't.

I have no doubt he will try.

I think the problem may be that he isn't going to change his principles or the agenda he ran on. If Dems are waiting for that--they'll be disappointed.

What would signal what you are looking for from Bush? What would you like to see him do?

0 Replies

I agree, Bush has given the "signal" that he is willing to heal the damage. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

0 Replies

Steppenwolf--

That's gracious of you--but I wasn't trying to get you to concede the point. You seem so reasonable--I was wondering if you had any specific things you were looking for Bush to do to prove to you he was trying to repair relations between the two parties.

If you were advising him...?

0 Replies

How about facing down some of those in his own party who oppose the Senate version of the Intelligence bill and getting them to reach a compromise that is closer to the 9-11 Commission's recommendation?

0 Replies

Lash-

That's a good question. Partisanship is easiest to criticize when it has already happened, so it is difficult to make a priori suggestions before possible party schisms show up. One suggestion would be to fill the new vacancies in his cabinet and agencies with political players that have a history of getting along with both parties. I think this would make the next four years smoother for everyone. Besides that, I guess I would play it by ear.

0 Replies

If Bush wants to unite, he can avoid some of his more extreme positions and compromise on others.

0 Replies

What extreme positions? True conservatives have been all over him for not being 'extreme' enough. I think he has done a great job of compromising--nobody has missed any pork yet and that includes all the Democrats who, right along with the Republicans, have been sticking it in all the bills and then complaining that George Bush squandered a however many trillion dollar surplus.

George Bush can hardly be faulted for not doing the about face most of the Dems did and following them in the opposite direction when they decided they could influence the election with a new anti-war stance.

The thing is he ran on specific campaign promises and he is one of those rare politicians who takes his campaign promises seriously. Now that he has been elected by a substantial majority, I won't fault him for believing that is a mandate to push his agenda forward. I can't think of anything that is all that off the wall, and if it is a really bad idea, not even the Republicans in Congress will vote for it.

I think it is the place of the loser to make most of the concessions anyway. That's the way it has always been.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

What extreme positions? True conservatives have been all over him for not being 'extreme' enough.

That some may be more extreme than Bush is no measure of whether or not he has extreme positions.

0 Replies

Quote:

I think it is the place of the loser to make most of the concessions anyway. That's the way it has always been.

Yes. I remember the conciliatory measures made by the GOP after both Clinton victories, that surely helped to heal the nati-- wait, was I in a coma then, was it a dream?

How did those losing GOPers treat Bill?

Did they set the example the Dems are now supposed to follow?

Joe

0 Replies

I don't think it matters anyway. We don't have enough people to make a difference if we hollered all day long.

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

I heard his first speech after Kerry conceded. He said he wants to heal the damage and work for those who voted for him, and those who didn't.
Quote:

he ran as a uniter the first time....can anyone deny we are as polarized and divided as we have ever been? There is no reason to think he will try to unite the country because by word and deed he hasn't given us any reason to believe it.....it's contigent on him to earn our trust at this point...not on us to give him the benefit of the doubt...been there done that...he **** on it....

0 Replies

Joe Nation wrote:

How about facing down some of those in his own party who oppose the Senate version of the Intelligence bill and getting them to reach a compromise that is closer to the 9-11 Commission's recommendation?

Well, that's specific. I appreciate you offering an idea, Joe.
Here's MY thing, though. Accepting it sight unseen is just a political gesture, I think, that may leave us with something that doesn't work well.

Wouldn't it be prudent to examine the thing--study it, and then evaluate whether or not its the BEST plan? Could you support that, and wait to judge the finished product?

Personally, I am concerned about adding another layer (see:firewall) between the CIA, the President and the FBI.

What are your thoughts? Anybody?

0 Replies

BPB--

He did run as a uniter... And, I can cite instances where he tried to do that. It seems to me he was met with unrelenting opposition by Daschle and the Dems. You can't unite if those you want to unite are refusing. All he could do was try. I think he did.

Now, if you want to take issue with his attitude toward international leaders--I am out of ammo. THERE, he can make attempts. Not ass-kissing, but improved attempts.

0 Replies

Well golly, I guess this would be a good time to encourge Bush to come through for his "abortion is murder" coalition and send a bill down to the house to insure that every woman that gets an abortion be charged with a capital offense (the doc who did it gets aiding and abetting) manditory sentencing being life without parole or death zero tolerance.

0 Replies

Take Three: Unite the USA or Not?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know